WebChimp

So............... For a practical application of your "no co-FTF" policy, when two cachers find it together, sign it as a team, log it under two accounts as FTF (since they were both there and did equal amounts of effort and are in agreement that they were co-FTF), you are going to have to decide who is or isn't FTF. And, you'll have to either note it on the listing, or delete their logs if both claim it. Your new caches will probably see in inordinate number of people claiming FTF, just to see what you do about the logs. This should be interesting. Sure they could share it. King Solomon came up with that solution a few thousand years ago!

So, two employees of the private property stopped to offer help or determine why you were on private company property. You lied about why you were there, when you you should have said 'I'm looking for a geocache.". Being cordial doesn't mean much when you're not telling the truth. It sounds to me like you meant well when you went there, but handled the situation wrong. The employees probably sensed you weren't being straight, and wanted you out of there pronto, probably for safety and legal concerns. Things would probably have gone much differently had you just told them the truth. Honesty isn't just the best policy, it shouold be the only policy.

So the real goal is to generate museum traffic. This mean you don't have to put the container in the museum itself. Matter of fact, that might be counter-productive, as people might be trying to open the wrong things, and that might be a problem in a museum. How about hiding the container outside the building, but make it a simple puzzle cache. Coords could be given as AA BB.CDE, etc. The clues could require hunters to tour the museum, and get the values of A, B, C, etc. by looking at the exhibits. "Find the mummified remains of Theo Stilsbringer. "A" equals the third number of the year his mummy was placed in the museum.", etc. This would make sure all hiders visit the museum exhibits, but the coords would lead outside, to a container somewhere near the exit. If you really wanted to be sneaky, you could list the coords as the museum's front porch (or whatever they have as an entrance), and have the puzzle resolve to the same coordinates. They end up where they started that way.

I'd think a "newbie hider" seminar would be helpful. Get a box full of containers, and explain how some common containers (plastic coffee cans, pill bottles, solo zip lock bags, etc.) aren't so great, due to water leakage, etc. (you get the idea), and work your way up to bison tubes, ammo boxes, and other traditional containers. Maybe show how to creatively camo a container, complete with a "paint your own container" table, and let the participants keep the container the camo'd. That might spur some newer cachers to get out there and place some new hides in your area. Go over the do's and don'ts, and maybe stuff each container with a slip of paper that has the hiding guidelines URL on it. Include an "art of the log book" segment, showing how a log book can be so much more than just a folded up piece of paper stuffed in a zip lock bag. Make up a few nifty custom log books with geocaching themed book covers (an 89 cent mini-composition book with a glued on computer generated cover glued on), etc. Cut a composition book to make a tiny log book that will fit neatly in a magnetic key holder. Hide some containers around the area, and demo good vs. not-so-good concealment. Explain that it will be concealed/re-concealed repeatedly, and show the difference a little planning can make. I hope this helps.

Simians like nanners. Thanks.

Life's full of little things like that, isn't it?

He did in the thread sub-title. At least he didn't include the adjective rude. That's something of an improvement over other recent rants.

Agreed. But I can't figure out where the pet peeve fits in... (Double quotes included to maintain the thread of thought...........) It's fits in when I try to read a forum post about geocaching, and a significant portion of the tread is previously stated and unnecessarily quoted text and images. Most of my forum access time is on broadband, but a part of it is on dialup. The over-quoted text and photos slows down the load speed so much that I no longer even try to load this forum while using dialup. Since this forum is an essential geocaching learning tool for us here in the hinterlands, usable access can be important to our geocaching lives.

Now I'm wondering "How can I possibly work that phrase into a conversation?".

Many people do use it, but since there seem to be so many who don't........ Here's the revised, proposed "Rule of Quotes": "Quote what you are replying to, but no more than necessary, and preview it first.". Ratification may be delayed a bit...

Darn. Another situation that needs attention. Okay, here's the new, proposed "Rule of Quotes": "Quote what you are replying to, but no more than necessary.". I'm sure this will be ratified in no time flat.

It's NOT? Well, then. That certainly explains a lot.

Oh, yeah. I didn't think about those replies while I was on my soapbox. Now that I'm off it, I guess I'll have to wait for the next opportunity.

I agree, I'm just wishing responders would only quote the parts that are pertinent to the reply. Quoting is good when it is the relevant section.

(I also dislike double posts. Darn.)

Geocaching is fun, and reading about geocaching is fun when the real thing can't be done. The best geocache reading takes place right here, in these forums. However: *Mounting soapbox, clearing throat...........* What rankles me....... really......... is when someone replies to a post, and then quotes the entire dang post just to add one or two sentences as a reply. Some even leave the inline image links intact, so that the next reader must display the entire post and view all images twice just in order to read the words "I agree" or some two sentence reply. It's time to learn how to edit the lines you quote. If the OP is five paragraphs, and one line really caught your attention, it's a good thing to take out everything except the one line that you are referring to. If the OP has a photo of a cache container, or some other cool thing, we've already seen the image. Please at least remove the image link from the quote you are replying to. Be bandwidth kind to other cachers. Please edit your quotes. *Dismounting soapbox, dusting self off, running for cover* (Yes, I know what's coming. Someone will quote this entire post and just say "I agree." I know it will happen, but for the sake of the common good, this needed to be said. Now resuming "running for cover" mode.)

In the current version, yes....... Didn't the older version require it to be unzipped first?

Not around here, he can't. We've got mtn-man. He wrote the book on "reviewers rock".

Got the GC number for it handy"?

Keep in mind WebChimp's "Rule Of Puzzle Proportionality": The number of finds will be inversely proportional to the difficulty of the puzzle.

A rose by any other name............ (Attributed to Billy S.) Words and labels don't change the substance of a thing. The words can be whatever one chooses, the nature of the thing discussed won't change. Calling a fake log a geocache find doesn't make it so, any more than putting long ears on a toad makes it a rabbit.

Ooooooo...... Amen. Another "amen". If I've got 10 or 15 finds in a day while on a caching trip, or while on a visit somewhere unusual, I frequently write a blurb about the general trip, and open each log with it (copy and paste). then I add the details about the specific cache. For example, the CP part of the log might start "Spent the day with XYZ hunting caches out of our home area, and had a great time. We drove 400 miles in one day through this beautiful state." The rest of the log about the specific cache is probably three times that long, the CP just keeps me from having to re-write the same thing over and over. About the short logs and the acronym logs....... There's a great cacher in our area, very experienced, super nice fellow, lots of finds and hides to his credit, but he just hates to type. He'll be with one of us when we find a nice cache, and while we're writing lengthy logs about the adventure, his log may be no more than "TFTC", or "This was fun. Thanks.". He just not much of a writer, and gets uncomfortable when he tries to write anything lengthy. He's the guy I keep thinking about when the OP goes on and on calling the authors of brief logs "rude and lazy". Nothing could be further from the mark with this one fellow, and I suspect there are others out there just like him. Not everyone is verbose by nature.

Huh? I thought we fought the British and kicked them out, I wasn't aware our independence was given to us by the French. Let me check......... just a minute......... Yes, I was right. Look, right here it says: "We got our independence by fighting the British and kicking them out.". I knew I was right. Wait, there's a footnote......... "Most British moved to Canada after they got their whuppin'."

This didn't sound too bad until I got to the part about the blood test and the living will.

It could be Belgian. They sound a lot alike.